head to head
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is reads, and it is a single point.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Solving procedurally generated corporate heists through precise resource and power management under escalating alarms.

Optimization · Pure Optimization
Racing to secure relics and optimize unit upgrade chains in a hostile hex-grid wargame.
Invisible, Inc. leans Optimization (Pure Optimization); Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War leans Optimization (Pure Optimization).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Invisible, Inc.
Turn-based movement; no twitch demands whatsoever
Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War
Hex turn-based; no physical precision ceiling
Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Invisible, Inc.
Corporate guards patrol on scripted timers; no adaptive opponent
Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War
AI factions follow fixed expansion doctrines without adaptive modelling
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Invisible, Inc.
Procedural floor layouts and alarm escalation add significant run variance
Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War
Random relic placement and event spawns add meaningful hidden unknowns
Same score on optimization - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Invisible, Inc.
Power allocation, agent pairing, and escape routing are the core puzzle
Warhammer 40,000: Gladius - Relics of War
Unit upgrade routing and resource building sequencing are deeply solvable
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.